Register-based program code conversion

ABSTRACT

A method of dynamic real time translation of first program code written for a first programmable machine into second program code (target code) for running on a second programmable machine employing run time generation of an intermediate representation of the first program code. The intermediate representation is generated to include a combination of register objects and expression objects. Register objects represent abstract registers that provide a representation of the state of the first programmable machine based on expected effects of the instructions within the first program code, while expression objects represent elements, such as operations or sub-operations, of the instructions in the first program code. In the intermediate representation, a branched tree-like network is formed in which each register object serves as a basic root of the network and references expression objects to which they relate either directly or indirectly through references from other expression objects.

CROSS REFERENCE TO RELATED APPLICATIONS

This application is a divisional of pending U.S. patent application Ser.No. 09/827,971 filed on Apr. 6, 2001, which is a continuation of pendingPCT Application No. PCT/GB99/03168, filed Oct. 11, 1999, which isincorporated by reference in its entirety herein, and claims priority toU.S. Provisional Patent Application No. 60/115,952 filed on Jan. 14,1999, now abandoned, which is incorporated by reference in its entiretyherein, and claims priority to GB Patent Application No. 9822075.9,filed Oct. 10, 1998, now abandoned, which is incorporated by referencein its entirety herein.

BACKGROUND OF THE INVENTION

1. Field of the Invention

The present invention relates to a method and system for convertingprogram code from one format to another. In particular, the inventionrelates to a method and system for providing an intermediaterepresentation of a computer program or a Basic Block of a program (aBasic Block of a program is a block of instructions that has only oneentry point, at a first instruction, and only one exit point, at a lastinstruction of the block). For instance, the present invention providesa method and system for the translation of a computer program which waswritten for one processor so that the program may run efficiently on adifferent processor; the translation utilising an intermediaterepresentation and being conducted in a block by block mode.

2. Description of Related Art

Intermediate representation is a term widely used in the computerindustry to refer to forms of abstract computer language in which aprogram may be expressed, but which is not specific to, and is notintended to be directly executed on, any particular processor.Intermediate representation is for instance generally created to allowoptimisation of a program. A compiler for example will translate a highlevel language computer program into intermediate representation,optimise the program by applying various optimisation techniques to theintermediate representation, then translate the optimised intermediaterepresentation into executable binary code. Intermediate representationis also used to allow programs to be sent across the Internet in a formwhich is not specific to any processor. Sun Microsystems have forexample developed a form of intermediate representation for this purposewhich is known as bytecode. Bytecode may be interpreted on any processoron which the well known Java (trade mark) run time system is employed.

Intermediate representation is also commonly used by emulation systemswhich employ binary translation. Emulation systems of this type takesoftware code which has been compiled for a given processor type,convert it into an intermediate representation, optimise theintermediate representation, then convert the intermediaterepresentation into a code which is able to run on another processortype. Optimisation of generating an intermediate representation is aknown procedure used to minimise the amount of code required to executean emulated program. A variety of known methods exist for theoptimisation of an intermediate representation.

An example of a known emulation system which uses an intermediaterepresentation for performing binary translation is the FlashPort systemoperated by AT&T. A customer provides AT&T with a program which is to betranslated (the program having been compiled to run on a processor of afirst type). The program is translated by AT&T into an intermediaterepresentation, and the intermediate representation is optimised via theapplication of automatic optimisation routines, with the assistance oftechnicians who provide input when the optimisation routines fail. Theoptimised intermediate translation is then translated by AT&T into codewhich is able to run on a processor of the desired type. This type ofbinary translation in which an entire program is translated before it isexecuted is referred to as ‘static’ binary translation. Translationtimes can be anything up to several months.

In an alternative form of emulation, a program in code of a subjectprocessor (i.e. a first type of processor for which the code is writtenand which is to be emulated) is translated in Basic Blocks, via anintermediate representation, into code of a target processor (i.e. asecond type of processor on which the emulation is performed).

The following is a summary of various aspects and advantages realizableaccording to various embodiments of the invention. It is provided as anintroduction to assist those skilled in the art to more rapidlyassimilate the detailed discussion of illustrative embodiments and isnot intended in any way to limit the scope of the claims which areappended hereto in order to particularly point out the invention.

A first aspect of the present invention provides a method of generatingan intermediate representation of program code, the method comprisingthe computer implemented steps of:

generating a plurality of register objects representing abstractregisters, a single register object representing a respective abstractregister; and

generating expression objects each representing a different element ofthe subject code as that element arises in the program, each expressionobject being referenced by a register object to which it relates eitherdirectly, or indirectly via references from other expression objects.

An element of subject code is an operation or sub-operation of a subjectcode instruction. Each subject code instruction may comprise a number ofsuch elements so that a number of expression objects may be generated torepresent a single subject code instruction.

Also according to another aspect of the invention there is provided amethod for generating an intermediate representation of computer programcode written for running on a programmable machine, said methodcomprising:

(i) generating a plurality of register objects for holding variablevalues to be generated by the program code; and

(ii) generating a plurality of expression objects representing fixedvalues and/or relationships between said fixed values and said variablevalues according to said program code;

said objects being organised into a branched tree-like network havingall register objects at the lowest basic root or tree-trunk level of thenetwork with no register object feeding into any other register object.

When forming an intermediate representation it is necessary to include arepresentation of the status of a subject processor (for instance of itsregisters or memory space) which is being represented by theintermediate representation. In the present invention this is done in aparticularly efficient manner by creating abstract registers.

According to another aspect of the present invention only a singleregister object need be generated to represent a given abstract register(which is preferable done for all abstract registers at initilisation),the state of each abstract register being defined by the expressionobjects referenced by the corresponding register object. Where more thanone expression object is referenced by a given register object a “tree”of expression objects is generated having the register object as its‘root’. The expression trees referenced by each of the register objectswill together form an “expression forest”.

An advantage realizable according to the teachings herein is that anygiven expression object may be referenced to more than one register, andconsequently an expression which is used by several different registersis not required to be created and assigned to each of those registersseparately, but may be created once and referenced to each of theregisters. In other words, expression trees may be linked together byexpression objects which are referenced by more than one registerobject. Thus, a given expression object may be common to a number ofexpression trees within the expression forest.

By avoiding making multiple copies of the same expression, the inventionreduces the time required to create the intermediate representation, andreduces the memory space occupied by the intermediate representation.

A further advantage realizable according to the teachings herein is thatexpressions that become redundant can be very efficiently identified.When a new expression is assigned to a register object any expressionpreviously referenced by that register object becomes redundant, exceptinsofar as it is referenced by other register objects. These multiplereferences are detected using reference counting, described below.

Any given expression object may have references from it to otherexpression objects, and references to it from other expression objectsor from abstract registers. A count is preferably maintained of thenumber of references leading to each expression object. Each time areference to an expression object (either from a register or anotherexpression object) is made or removed, the count for that expressionobject is adjusted. A count of zero for a given expression objectindicates that there are no references leading to that expressionobject, and that that expression object is therefore redundant.

Preferably, when a count for a given expression object is zero, thatexpression object is eliminated from the intermediate representation.

When an expression object is eliminated, the deletion of all referenceswhich lead from that expression object results in each referencedexpression object having its reference count decremented. Where thisdecremented value has reached zero, the referenced object can beeliminated in turn, causing its referenced objects to have theirreference counts decremented in turn.

The intermediate representation of the invention thus allows redundantcode to be located and eliminated efficiently. In binary translatedprograms, redundant code frequently arises when the contents of aregister are defined and subsequently redefined without first beingused. The known existing intermediate representations require that arecord be kept indicating when the contents of a given register aredefined, and indicating when the contents of that register are used.This record keeping is an inefficient method of identifying redundantcode. In the present invention, redundant code is immediately apparentfrom the sequence of assignments to and uses of the register objects.

According to another aspect of the present invention there is provided amethod for generating an intermediate representation of computer codewritten for running on a programmable machine, said method comprising:

(i) generating a plurality of register objects for holding variablevalues to be generated by the program code; and

(ii) generating a plurality of expression objects representing fixedvalues and/or relationships between said fixed values and said variablevalues according to said program code;

wherein at least one variably sized register is represented by pluralregister objects, one register object being provided for each possiblesize of the variably sized register.

According to another aspect of the present invention there is provided amethod of generating an intermediate representation of program codeexpressed in terms of the instruction set of a subject processorcomprising at least one variable sized register, the method comprisingthe computer implemented steps of:

generating a set of associated abstract register objects representing arespective one of the or each variable sized processor registers, theset comprising one abstract register for each possible width of therespective variable size register;

for each write operation of a certain field width to the variable sizedregister, writing to an abstract register of the same width;

maintaining a record of which abstract registers contain valid data,which record is updated upon each write operation; and

for each read operation of a given field width, determining from saidrecord whether there is valid data in more than one of said differentsized abstract registers of the set which must be combined to give thesame effect as the same read operation performed upon the variable sizeregister; and

a) if it is determined that no combination is so required, readingdirectly from the appropriate register, or

b) if it is determined that data from more than one register must be socombined, combining the contents of those registers.

In the above, variable-sized register is intended to mean a registerwhose contents may be modified by writing values to sub-fields whichoverlay part or parts of the fall width of the register.

Whether or not data from more than one register must be combined, and ifso which registers must be combined, may be determined in accordancewith the following conditions in respect of each set of different sizedabstract registers:

i) if the data required for an access lies wholly within one validabstract register, that register only is accessed; and

ii) if the data required for an access lies within more than one validabstract register, data is combined from those valid abstract registersto perform the access.

For instance, in known subject processors including the Motorola 68000series it would be necessary to access only a single register inaccordance with step (i) above when:

a) there is valid data in only one of said abstract registers, in whichcase that register is accessed;

b) if there is valid data in a register of a size corresponding to thewidth of the access and no valid data in any smaller register, then onlythe register corresponding in size to the width of the access isaccessed; and

c) if the registers containing valid data are larger than the registercorresponding in size to the width of the access, only the smallest ofthe registers containing valid data is accessed.

Also, in known subject processors if data required for an access lieswithin more than one valid abstract register such that data from two ormore registers must be combined, the combination may be performed asfollows:

a) if there is valid data in two or more registers of a sizecorresponding to or smaller than the width of the read operation, datafrom each of those registers is combined; and

b) if there is no data in a register corresponding in size to the sizeof the read operation, but there is data in a larger register and asmaller register, data from each of those registers is combined.

When the intermediate representation is representing a region of aprogram (comprising one or more Basic Blocks) in which all registeraccesses are of the same width, there is no requirement to combine thecontents of the abstract registers, and data may simply be written to orread from a single abstract register in a single operation. The targetprocessor code will therefore be simplified. The more complicatedprocedure of combining the contents of two abstract registers will onlybe required where any particular region of code includes registeraccesses of different bit widths.

The foregoing approach enables overcoming a problem which arises duringemulation of a processor, and specifically when the emulated processorutilises variable sized registers. The nature of the problem addressedis best appreciated by example.

An example of an instruction-set which uses a variable-sized register isthe Motorola 68000 architecture. In the 68000 architecture, instructionsthat are specified as ‘long’ (.1). operate on all 32 bits of a registeror memory location. Instructions that are specified as ‘word’ (.w). or‘byte’ (.b). operate on only the bottom 16 and bottom 8 bitsrespectively, of a register or memory location. Even if a byte addition,for example, generates a carry, that carry is not propagated into the9th bit of the register.

A situation which occurs in variable-sized registers is illustrated inan 68000 code example shown below:

The initial ‘move.I’ instruction in the example writes to all 32 bits ofthe register address ‘d0’. This is illustrated above by the lightershading covering all parts of the box representing register ‘d0’. The‘add.b’ instruction writes only to the bottom 8 bits of register ‘d0’,and the top 24 bits remain in exactly the same state they were in beforethe ‘add.b’ instruction. The part of register ‘d0’ that has beenaffected by the ‘add.b’ instruction is shown by darker shading. If theentire content of the register ‘d0’ is now copied to another register orto memory, the bottom 8 bits copied will be those generated by the‘add.b’ instruction, and the top 24 bits copied will be those generatedby the ‘move.1’ instruction.

An emulation system must represent each of the registers used by asubject processor which it is emulating. When an intermediaterepresentation of a program is produced as part of an emulation, it ispreferable that intermediate representation is capable of beingconverted into code which will execute on any architecture of targetprocessor. Thus, the intermediate representation should preferably notinclude any assumptions regarding the type of target processor whichwill be used to execute the code. In this case, the particularassumption which must be avoided is the assumption that the upper 24bits of a 32 bit register on a target processor will be maintained intheir existing form when the 8 bits of data are written to the registeras described in the example above. Some possible target processors willinstead write the 8 bits of data to the lowest 8 bits of a register, andthen fill the remaining 24 bits with zeros. The intermediaterepresentation should preferably be constructed in such a way that itmay be executed on a target processor of either form (once it has beentranslated into the appropriate code).

One manner in which this problem may be overcome is to create a complexexpression which manipulates different sections of a target processorregister in an appropriate manner—the expression required in thisexample would be as follows:d 0=((d 0+x)& 0×ff)|(d 0 & 0×ffffff 00)This expression performs a 32-bit addition on the target processorregister, extracts the bottom 8 bits, and then restores the top 24 bitsto their original value.

It is unusual to find an instruction which manipulates data of a certainwidth between two instructions which manipulate data of differentwidths, (the situation that was illustrated above). It is more usual tofind groups of instructions which manipulate data of the same widthgrouped together in programs. One region of a program, for example, mayoperate on bytes of data, for example character processing code, andanother region of the program may operate on 32-bit wide data, forexample pointer manipulation code. In these common cases where eachself-contained region of code operates on data of only a single width,no special action needs to be taken. For example, if a region of aprogram is moving and manipulating only bytes, these byte values may bestored in 32-bit registers of a target processor, and the top 24 hits ofthe registers ignored since these 24 bits are never accessed. If theprogram then starts manipulating 16-bit wide data, those targetprocessor registers which are involved in the 16-bit operations are verylikely to be loaded with 16-bit items before any word operations takeplace, and as a result, no conflicts will occur (i.e. the top 16 bits ofdata are ignored). However, there is no way of knowing whether it isnecessary to preserve the top 24 bits of the registers (for example)during the earlier operations which use byte values, until operationsusing 16 or 32 bits are encountered.

Since there is no way of knowing whether all or some of the bits held ina register may be discarded, the above described technique of buildingcomplex expressions to represent operations which use conflictingoperand widths must be applied to every instruction in order to functioncorrectly. This technique which is used in the known intermediaterepresentations therefore imposes a major overhead in order to solve aproblem which occurs only occasionally.

The use of separate abstract registers to represent each of the possiblesizes of subject processor registers as described above, is advantageousbecause it allows data to be written to or moved from an abstractregister in the intermediate representation without requiring extraprocessing during a region of a program which uses only one width ofdata. Thus, a calculation only need be made (ie. the combination of dataof different widths) on those infrequent occasions when the intermediaterepresentation is required to represent data of different widths beingwritten to and read from a subject processor register.

Yet another aspect of the present invention reduces the amount oftranslated code. It is a property of subject code that:

i) a Basic Block of code may have alternative and unused entryconditions. This may be detected at the time the translation isperformed; and

ii) a Basic Block of code may have alternative, and unused, possibleeffects or functions. In general, this will only be detectable when thetranslated code is executed.

According to another aspect of the present invention, there is provideda method of generating an intermediate representation of computerprogram code, the method comprising the computer implemented steps of:

on the initial translation of a given portion of subject code,generating and storing only intermediate representation which isrequired to execute that portion of program code with a prevailing setof conditions; and

whenever subsequently the same portion of subject code is entered,determining whether intermediate representation has previously beengenerated and stored for that portion of subject code for the subsequentconditions, and if no such intermediate representation has previouslybeen generated, generating additional intermediate representationrequired to execute said portion of subject code with said subsequentconditions.

Such approaches reduce the amount of translated code by permittingmultiple, but simpler, blocks of intermediate representation code forsingle Basic Blocks of subject code. In most cases only one simplertranslated block will be required.

According to another aspect of the present invention, there is provideda method for generating an intermediate representation of computer codewritten for running on a programmable machine, said method comprising:

(i) generating a plurality of register objects for holding variablevalues to be generated by the program code; and

(ii) generating a plurality of expression objects representing fixedvalues and/or relationships between said fixed values and said variablevalues according to said program code;

said intermediate representation being generated and stored for a blockof computer code and subsequently re-used if the same block of code islater re-entered, and wherein at least one block of said first computerprogram code can have alternative un-used entry conditions or effects orfunctions and said intermediate representation is only initiallygenerated and stored as required to execute that block of the programcode with a then prevailing set of conditions.

For instance, in a preferred embodiment of the invention the methodincludes computer implemented steps of:

generating an Intermediate Representation Block (IR Block) ofintermediate representation for each Basic Block of the program code asit is required by the program, each IR Block representing a respectiveBasic Block of program code for a particular entry condition;

storing target code corresponding to each IR Block; and

when the program requires execution of a Basic Block for a given entrycondition, either:

a) if there is a stored target code representing that Basic Block forthat given entry condition, using said stored target code; or

b) if there is no stored target code representing that Basic Block forthat given entry condition, generating a further IR Block representativeof that Basic Block for that given entry condition.

A Basic Block is a group of sequential instructions in the subjectprocessor i.e. subject code. A Basic Block has only one entry point andterminates either immediately prior to another Basic Block or at a jump,call or branch instruction (whether conditional or unconditional). An IRBlock is a block of intermediate representation and represents thetranslation of a Basic Block of subject code. Where a set of IR Blockshave been generated to represent the same Basic Block but for differententry conditions, the IR Blocks within that set are referred to below asIsoBlocks.

This approach may be applied to static translation, but is particularlyapplicable to emulation via dynamic binary translation. According to theinvention, an emulation system may be configured to translate a subjectprocessor program Basic Block by Basic Block. When this approach isused, the state of an emulated processor following execution of a BasicBlock of program determines the form of the IR Block used to represent asucceeding Basic Block of the program.

In contrast, in known emulators which utilise translation, anintermediate representation of a Basic Block of a program is generated,which is independent of the entry conditions at the beginning of thatBasic Block of program. The intermediate representation is thus requiredto take a general form, and will include for example a test to determinethe validity (or otherwise) of abstract registers. In contrast to this,in the present invention the validity (or otherwise) of the abstractregisters is already known and the IR block therefore does not need toinclude the validity test. Furthermore, since the validity of theabstract registers is known, the IR block will include only that codewhich is required to combine valid abstract registers and is notrequired to include code capable of combining all abstract registers.This provides a significant performance advantage, since the amount ofcode required to be translated into intermediate representation forexecution is reduced. If a Basic Block of a program has previously beentranslated into intermediate representation for a given set of entryconditions, and if it commences with different entry conditions, thesame Basic Block of the program will be re-translated into an IsoBlockof intermediate representation.

A further advantage is that the resulting IR Blocks and IsoBlocks ofintermediate representation are less complex than an intermediaterepresentation which is capable of representing all entry conditions,and may therefore be optimised more quickly and will also be translatedinto target processor code which executes more quickly.

This approach also exploits subject code instructions which may have anumber of possible effects or functions, not all of which may berequired when the instruction is first executed, and some of which maynot in fact be required at all. This aspect of the invention may only beused when the intermediate representation is generated dynamically. Thatis, a preferred method according to the present invention preferablycomprises, when the intermediate representation of the program isgenerated dynamically as the program is running, the computerimplemented steps of:

at a first iteration of a particular subject code instruction having aplurality of possible effects or functions, generating and storingspecial-case intermediate representation representing only the specificfunctionality required at that iteration; and

at each subsequent iteration of the same subject code instruction,determining whether special-case intermediate representation has beengenerated for the functionality required at said subsequent iterationand generating additional special-case intermediate representationspecific to that functionality if no such special-case intermediaterepresentation has previously been generated.

This aspect of the invention overcomes a problem associated withemulation systems, namely the translation of unnecessary features ofsubject processor code. When a complex instruction is decoded from asubject processor code into the intermediate representation, it iscommon that only a subset of the possible effects of that instructionwill ever be used at a given place in the subject processor program. Forexample, in a CISC (Complex Instruction Set Computer) instruction set, amemory load instruction may be defined to operate differently dependingon what type of descriptor is contained in a base register (thedescriptor describes how information is stored in the memory). However,in most programs only one descriptor type will be used by eachindividual load instruction of that program. A translator in accordancewith this invention will generate special-case intermediaterepresentation which includes a load instruction defined for only thatdescriptor type.

Preferably, when the special-case intermediate representation isgenerated and stored an associated test procedure is generated andstored to determine on subsequent iterations of the respective subjectcode instruction whether the required functionality is the same as thatrepresented by the associated stored special-case intermediaterepresentation, and where additional special-case intermediaterepresentation is required an additional test procedure associated withthat special-case intermediate representation is generated and storedwith that additional special-case intermediate representation.

Preferably, the additional special case intermediate representation fora particular subject code instruction and the additional associated testprocedure is stored at least initially in subordinate relation to anyexisting special-case intermediate representation and associated testprocedures stored to represent the same subject instruction, such thatupon the second and subsequent iteration of a subject code instructiondetermination of whether or not required special-case intermediaterepresentation has previously been generated is made by performing saidtest procedures in the order in which they were generated and storeduntil either it is determined that special-case intermediaterepresentation of the required functionality exists or it is determinedthat no such required special-case intermediate representation exists inwhich case more additional intermediate representation and anotherassociated test procedure is generated.

Preferably the intermediate representation is optimised by adjusting theordering of the test procedures such that test procedures associatedwith more frequently used special-case intermediate representation arerun before test procedures associated with less frequently usedspecial-case intermediate representation rather than ordering the testprocedures in the order in which they are generated.

Intermediate representation generated in accordance with any of theabove methods may be used, for instance, in the translation of acomputer program written for execution by a processor of a first type sothat the program may be executed by a different processor, and also as astep in optimising a computer program. In the latter case, intermediaterepresentation may be generated to represent a computer program writtenfor execution by a particular processor, that intermediaterepresentation may then be optimised and then converted back into thecode executable by that same processor.

Although the approach just described above relates to the generation ofintermediate representation, the steps described therein may be appliedto the generation of target code directly from subject code, without thegeneration of intermediate representation.

Thus, the present invention may also provide a method of generatingtarget code representation of computer program code, the methodcomprising the computer implemented steps of:

on the initial translation of a given portion of subject code,generating and storing only target code which is required to executethat portion of program code with a prevailing set of conditions; and

whenever subsequently the same portion of subject code is entered,determining whether target code has previously been generated and storedfor that portion of subject code for the subsequent conditions, and ifno such target code has previously been generated, generating additionaltarget code required to execute said portion of subject code with saidsubsequent conditions.

It will be appreciated that many of the features and advantagesdescribed in relation to the generation of intermediate representationwill correspondingly apply to the generation of target code.

According to another aspect of the present invention there is provided amethod of dynamically translating first computer program code writtenfor compilation and/or translation and running on a first programmablemachine into second computer program code for running on a differentsecond programmable machine. Said method comprising:

(a) generating an intermediate representation of a block of said firstcomputer program code;

(b) generating a block of said second computer program code from saidintermediate representation;

(c) running said block of second computer program code on said secondprogrammable machine; and

(d) repeating steps a-c in real time for at least the blocks of firstcomputer program code needed for a current emulated execution of thefirst computer program code on said second programmable machine.

This method realises the benefits of using intermediate representationin the real time translation of computer code.

BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF THE DRAWINGS

An illustrative specific embodiment of the present invention applied toa dynamic emulation system will now be described, by way of exampleonly, with reference to the accompanying drawings, in which:

FIGS. 1 to 5 are schematic illustrations of the manner in which adynamic emulation system according to the present invention generates anintermediate representation of a program or a Basic Block of a program,they also show the expression forest (group of expression trees) whichis a novel feature of this invention; and

FIGS. 6 and 7 are schematic illustrations of the manner in which thedynamic emulation system generates an intermediate representation of aBasic Block of a program which depends upon starting conditions at thebeginning of that Basic Block of the program.

DETAILED DESCRIPTION OF ILLUSTRATIVE EMBODIMENTS

The illustrative embodiments of the invention described below provide,among other aspects, a system for emulating the instruction set of oneprocessor on a processor of a different type. In the followingdescription the term subject processor refers to a processor which is tobe emulated by an emulation system and target processor refers to aprocessor upon which the emulation system is run. The system is adynamic binary translation system which essentially operates bytranslating Basic Blocks of instructions in the subject processor codeinto target processor code as they are required for execution. Theemulation system, as described below, comprises three major components,referred to respectively as a Front End, a Core, and a Back End. Thesubject processor instructions are decoded and converted into theintermediate representation by the Front End of the emulation system.The Core of the emulation system analyses and optimises the intermediaterepresentation of the subject processor instructions, and the Back Endconverts the intermediate representation into target processor codewhich will run on the target processor.

The Front End of the system is specific to the subject processor that isbeing emulated. The Front End configures the emulation system inresponse to the form of subject processor, for example specifying thenumber and names of subject processor registers which are required bythe emulation, and specifying to the Back End the virtual memorymappings that will be required.

Subject processor instructions are converted into intermediaterepresentation in Basic Blocks, each resulting intermediaterepresentation block (IR Block) then being treated as a unit by the Corefor emulation, caching, and optimisation purposes.

The Core optimises the intermediate representation generated by theFront End. The Core has a standard form irrespective of the subject andtarget processors connected to the emulation system. Some Core resourceshowever, particularly register numbers and naming, and the detailednature of IR Blocks, are configured by an individual Front End to suitthe requirements of that specific subject processor architecture.

The Back End is specific to the target processor and is invoked by theCore to translate intermediate representation into target processorinstructions. The Back End is responsible for allocating and managingtarget processor registers, for generating appropriate memory load andstore instructions to emulate the subject processor correctly, forimplementing a calling sequence to permit the Core to call dynamicroutines, and to enable those dynamic routines to call Back End andFront End routines as appropriate.

The operation of the emulation system will now be described in moredetail. The system is initialised, to create appropriate linkagesbetween Front End, Core, and Back End. At the end of initialisation, anexecution cycle is commenced, and the Core calls the front End to decodea first Basic Block of subject processor instructions. The Front Endoperates instruction by instruction, decoding each subject processorinstruction of the Basic Block in turn, and calling Core routines tocreate an intermediate representation for each sub-operation of eachinstruction. When the Front End decodes an instruction that couldpossibly cause a change of program sequence (for instance a jump, call,or branch instruction, whether conditional or unconditional), it returnsto the Core before decoding further subject processor instructions(thereby ending that Basic Block of code).

When the Front End has translated a Basic Block of subject processorinstructions into the intermediate representation, the Core optimisesthe intermediate representation then invokes the Back End to dynamicallygenerate a sequence of instructions in the target processor code (targetinstructions) which implement the intermediate representation of theBasic Block. When that sequence of target instructions is generated itis executed immediately. The sequence of target processor instructionsis retained in a cache for subsequent reuse (unless it is firstoverwritten).

When the target processor instructions have been executed a value isreturned which indicates an address which is to be executed next. Inother words, the target processor code evaluates any branch, call, orjump instructions, whether conditional or unconditional, at the end ofthe Basic Block, and returns its effect. This process of translation andexecution of Basic Blocks continues until a Basic Block is encounteredwhich has already been translated.

When target code representing the next Basic Block has been usedpreviously and has been stored in the cache, the Core simply calls thattarget code. When the end of the Basic Block is reached, again thetarget code supplies the address of the next subject instruction to beexecuted, and the cycle continues.

Both the intermediate representation and target-processor code arelinked to Basic Blocks of subject processor instructions. Theintermediate representation linked so that the optimiser can generateefficient emulations of groups of frequently-executed IR Blocks, and thetarget code is linked so that the second and subsequent executions ofthe same Basic Block can execute the target code directly, withoutincurring the overhead of decoding the instructions again.

The Front End requests that a required number of abstract registers bedefined in the Core at initialisation time. These abstract registers(labelled Ri) represent the physical registers that would be used by thesubject processor instructions if they were to run on a subjectprocessor. The abstract registers define the state of the subjectprocessor which is being emulated, by representing the expected effectof the instructions on the subject processor registers.

The intermediate representation represents the subject processor programby assigning expression objects to abstract registers. Expressionobjects are a means of representing in the intermediate representationthe effect of, for example, an individual arithmetic, logical, orconditional operation. Since many subject processor instructions carryout manipulation of data, most instructions generate expression objectsto represent their individual sub-operations. Expression objects areused, for example, to represent addition operations, condition settingoperations, conditional evaluation in conditional branches, and memoryread operations. The abstract registers are referenced to expressionobjects, which are referenced to other expression objects so that eachBasic Block of subject processor instructions is represented by a numberof inter-referenced expression objects which may be considered as anexpression forest.

A series of illustrated examples will be used to convey how theemulation system uses expression objects (referred to as Expressions)and abstract registers to build up an intermediate representation ofsubject processor instructions. FIGS. 1 to 5 show step by step (with theprogression of incremental steps indicated by reference numerals 1-12 inFIGS. 1 to 5) how the following pseudo-assembler code is represented inthe Core using abstract registers:

1: MOVE #3 → R0 2: MOVE R6 → R2 3: ADD R0, R2 → R1 4: MUL R1, #5 → R5 5:AND R3, R1 → R4 6: MOVE #5 → R1 7: SUB #1, R3 → R2 8: LOAD #3fd0 → R0

The representation of the MOVE instruction in line 1 is shown in FIG. 1;a Long Constant Expression, #3 is created, and assigned to abstractRegister R0 by creating a reference leading from R0 to #3. The MOVEinstruction in line 2 references the value of abstract register R6, anda Register Reference Expression is used to represent this and isassigned to P2. The Register Reference (RegRef) Expression in FIG. 1,@R6, represents the value of Register R6, whatever it may be. The RegRefExpression @R6 becomes the current definition of Register R6. From thispoint onwards, unless Register R6 is redefined, it will return theExpression @ R6 as its definition.

The operand of a subject processor instruction may either be a constantor a reference to a Register. The representation of a constant operandis straightforward as was shown in FIG. 1. When an operand refers to aregister however the situation is different. The representation of line3 of the pseudo-assembler code is shown in FIG. 2 from which it will beseen that the ADD operation is assigned to abstract register R1, by areference from R1 to an Add Expression. The ADD instruction in line 3refers to registers R0 and R2, and the Expression that defines each ofthese registers has already been built in intermediate representation.When the Add Expression is created, it interrogates abstract RegistersR0 and R2 to yield their defining Expressions, and the Add Expression(which is assigned to abstract register R1) makes a reference to these.The intermediate representation of the ADD instruction is shown in FIG.2. In other words, the contents of abstract Register RI is an Expressionwhich references the Expressions held in the abstract Registers R0 andR2. Each arrow in FIGS. 1 and 2 represents a reference, which can eitherreference a Register to an Expression, as in the case of R0 →#3, or anExpression to another Expression, as in the case of #3←+→R6. TheExpression @R6 has two references, one from Register R2, and the otherfrom the Add Expression.

A MUL instruction, as included in line 4 of the above code, may beregarded as a typical data flow instruction. A top-level Expression isbuilt by either creating new sub-Expressions or referencing existingExpressions, and this top-level Expression is assigned to a Register asits definition. The intermediate representation of the MUL instructionis shown in FIG. 3. A MUL Expression which references the Expressionheld in the abstract Register R1, and references a Long ConstantExpression #5, is created and assigned to abstract Register R5.

The And Expression of line 5 of the above code is shown in FIG. 4. ThisExpression references a Register whose definition has yet to be built(i.e. R3), using a RegRef Expression in the same way as described abovein relation to FIG. 1.

In the examples thus far presented, it has been assumed that a Registeris defined for the first time within a particular Basic Block. FIG. 5illustrates what happens when a Register that has already been definedis redefined, as by the MOVE instruction of line 6 of the above code.Whereas in FIGS. 2 to 4, an arrow referenced R1 to an Add Expression,this reference is now removed, and a new reference arrow is created toreference R1 to the Long Constant Expression #5.

As well as being connected to R1, the Add Expression was also connectedto the MUL Expression and the And Expression, and therefore continues tohave an existence as is shown in FIG. 5 (if however the Add Expressionhad only one reference, the one from Register R1, the Add Expressionwould be left with no references after R1 was redefined; in this casethe Add Expression would be known as ‘dead’, and would be redundant). Inaddition, FIG. 5 illustrates the effect of the SUB operation of line 7of the pseudo-assembler code.

The final line, line 8, of the pseudo-assembler code to be representedas intermediate representation is a LOAD instruction. A Load Expressionwhich represents this instruction is shown in FIG. 5, referenced toRegister RO. The Load Expression can be thought of as a type of unaryoperator that represents the result of applying the LOAD operation toits single Expression operand. In FIG. 5, LOAD →#3fd0 represents thevalue at a memory location 3fd0, whatever this value may be. The LoadExpression has similar properties to the RegRef Expression, in that oneLoad Expression may represent any possible value depending on what datais stored in memory.

A reference count is maintained which indicates the number of referencesleading to each expression object (the reference count of any givenexpression object does not include references from that expressionobject). Each time a reference is made to an expression object (eitherfrom a register or another expression object), or is removed from thatexpression object, the reference count for that expression object isadjusted. A reference count of zero for a given expression object,indicates that there are no references leading to that expressionobject, and that that expression object is therefore redundant. When areference count for a given expression object is zero, that expressionobject is eliminated from the intermediate representation.

Once an expression object has been eliminated, any references which leadfrom that expression object are also eliminated, and the reference countof those expression objects to which the references lead is adjustedaccordingly. The process of eliminating expression objects with a zeroreference count and eliminating references leading from such an objectis followed down the expression forest.

Further optimisation of the intermediate generalisation may be achievedby eliminating redundant lines of subject processor code, as describedbelow.

When a complicated instruction is decoded from the subject processorcode into intermediate representation, it is common that only a subsetof the possible effects of that instruction will ever be used at a givenplace in the subject program. For example, in a CISC instruction set, amemory load instruction may be defined to operate differently dependingon what type of descriptor is contained in a base register (thedescriptor describes how information is stored in the memory). However,in most programs only one descriptor type will be used by eachindividual load instruction in the program.

In the emulation system of the invention, the Front End queries run-timevalues as the subject processor program is being executed, and generatesspecial-case intermediate representation as necessary. In the examplegiven above, special-case intermediate representation will be generatedwhich omits those parts of the memory load instruction which relate todescriptor types not used by the program.

The special-case is guarded by a test which, if it ever detects atrun-time that additional functionality is required, causes re-entry tothe Front End to produce additional code. If, during optimisation, it isdiscovered that an initial assumption is wrong (for example anassumption that a particular descriptor type is being used throughoutthe program), the optimiser will reverse the sense of the test, so thata more frequently-used functionality will be selected more quickly thanthe initially chosen, less frequently-used functionality.

The emulation system of the invention is capable of emulating subjectprocessors which use variable-sized registers, as described below.

An example of an instruction-set architecture which uses avariable-sized register is the architecture of the Motorola 68000 seriesof processors. In the 68000 architecture, instructions that arespecified as ‘long’ (.1) operate on all 32 bits of a register or memorylocation. Instructions that are specified as ‘word’ (.w) or ‘byte’ (.b)operate on only the bottom 16 and bottom 8 bits respectively, of a32-bit register or memory location. Even if a byte addition, forexample, generates a carry, that carry is not propagated into the 9thbit of the register.

To avoid conflict between different instructions operating on data ofdifferent widths (in this example in a 68000 processor), for eachsubject processor register the system according to the invention createsa set of three abstract registers, each register of the set beingdedicated to data of a given width (i.e. one register for each of byte,word and long word data). Each register of a 68000 processor alwaysstores a 32-bit datum, whereas instructions may operate on 8-bit or16-bit subsets of this 32-bit datum. In the Core of a system whose FrontEnd is configured to be connected to a 68000, byte values for a subjectprocessor ‘d0’, for example, will be stored in an abstract registerlabelled ‘D0_B’ whereas word values are stored in a separate abstractregister labelled ‘DO_W’ and long values are stored in a third abstractregister labelled ‘D0_L’. In contrast to the data registers, the 68000address registers have only two valid address sizes: word and long. Inthis example therefore, the Core will need only two abstract registersto represent each 68000 address register: ‘A0_L’ and ‘A0_W’.

If no conflict regarding instruction size arises within a particularBasic Block of subject processor instructions (i.e. if all of theinstructions within that Basic Block are of the same bit width), thedata contained in the appropriate abstract register can be accessedfreely. If, however, a conflict does arise (i.e. instructions ofdifferent bit widths are stored/read from a given subject processorregister), the correct data may be derived by combining the contents oftwo or more abstract registers in an appropriate way. An advantage ofthis scheme is that the Core is simplified since all operations onabstract registers are carried out on 32-bit data items.

The difference between subject processor registers and abstractregisters is of importance when considering the effect of variable-sizedregisters. A subject processor register, such as ‘d0’ in the 68000architecture, is a unit of fast store in a subject processor, which unitis referred to in assembler operands by its label (‘do’ in this case).In contrast to this, abstract registers are objects which form anintegral part of the intermediate representation of the Core, and areused to represent the set of subject processor registers. Abstractregisters contain extra semantics over and above those in a subjectprocessor register, and any number of abstract registers may be used torepresent a single subject processor register, provided that the correctsemantics for interaction with the subject processor are preserved. Asmentioned above, in the invention, the Front End requires three abstractregisters to represent each 68000 data register (i.e. one for each widthof data: byte, word and long word), and two abstract registers torepresent each 68000 address register. In contrast to this, animplementation of a MIPS Front End, for example, might map a singlesubject processor register to a single abstract register.

The tables below summarise for the 68000 how the contents of two or moreabstract registers are treated when instructions of different sizes readand write to a subject processor register. The manner in which data iscombined depends on the current state of the subject processor register.

TABLE 1a Current State (d0) D0_L D0_W D0_B ✓ X X ✓ X ✓ ✓ ✓ X ✓ ✓ ✓

TABLE 1b New State After Writing (d0) Long Word Word Byte D0_L D0_W D0_BD0_L D0_W D0_B D0_L D0_W D0_B ✓ X X ✓ ✓ X ✓ X ✓ ✓ X X ✓ ✓ X ✓ X ✓ ✓ X X✓ ✓ X ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ X X ✓ ✓ X ✓ ✓ ✓

TABLE 2a Current State (d0) D0_L D0_W D0_B ✓ X X ✓ X ✓ ✓ ✓ X ✓ ✓ ✓

TABLE 2b Combine Before Reading L W B D0_L D0_L D0_L D0_L/D0_B D0_L/D0_BD0_B D0_L/D0_W D0_W D0_W D0_L/D0_W/D0_B D0_W/D0_B D0_B

Tables 1 and 2 represent the state of a subject processor register ‘d0’in terms of abstract registers D0_L, D0_W and D0_B (i.e. the abstractregisters which represent subject processor register ‘d0’).

Table 1a “Current State” represents a given state of the register d0, byindicating whether or not each of the abstract registers D0_L, D0_W andD0_B contains valid data. The first row of Table 1a represents a givenstate of the register d0, namely that the register contains 32-bit data,and indicates that only the abstract register D0_L (corresponding to32-bit data) contains valid data. If, for example, it is assumed thatinitially, all 32 bits of subject processor register ‘d0’ are valid, thecurrent state of ‘d0’ will be as is represented by the first row of theTable 1a (an X symbol indicates that the marked register does notcontain any valid data).

Table 1b “New State after Writing” illustrates the effect of writeinstructions performed in accordance with the present invention. If d0contains 32-bit data, as indicated by the first row of Table 1a, and isthen written to by a long instruction, the effect of the write operationis as indicated by the first row of the ‘Long Word’ section of Table 1b.Abstract register DO_L remains valid (i.e. contains valid data) asindicated by a ‘✓’ symbol, whereas abstract registers DO_W and DO_Bremain invalid, as indicated by a ‘X’ symbol since no data has beenwritten to them. The state of ‘d0’ therefore has not been changed.

If ‘d0’, in the state shown in the first row of Table 1a, is written toby a byte of data, the new current state of ‘d0’ is represented by the‘Byte’ section of Table 1b. In this case the register is valid for bothlong data and byte data (i.e. both abstract registers DO_L and DO_Bcontain valid data).

Tables 2a “Current State” and 2b “Combine before Reading” illustrate howthe contents of abstract registers DO_L, DO_W and DO_B are combined whendata is to be read from subject processor register ‘d0’. For instance,if the current state of register d0 is as indicated in the second row ofTable 2a, then abstract registers D0_L and D0_B contain valid data. Ifregister d0 is read by a long instruction (i.e. all 32-bits are readfrom ‘d0’), row 2 of Table 2b at column L shows that the correct valueof ‘d0’ must be derived by combining the contents of abstract registersDO_L and DO_B in an appropriate way. In this case the bottom 8 bits ofregister D0_B must be combined with the top 24 bits of register D0_L. Onthe other hand, if subject processor register ‘d0’ were to be read by abyte instruction, the contents of D0_B could be read directly, withoutreference to abstract registers D0_L or D0_W.

The use of separate abstract registers for each width of data, asdescribed above, allows data to be accessed easily when a section ofsubject processor code which uses a single width of data is beingemulated. This is a very common situation and will arise, for example,where one section of a program operates on bytes of data, for examplecharacter processing code, and another section of the program operateson 32-bit data, for example pointer manipulation code. The inventiononly requires a calculation to be made (i.e. the combination of data ofdifferent widths) on those infrequent occasions when data of differentwidths are written to and read from a subject processor register.

The known techniques of creating a complicated expression whichmanipulates different sections of a subject processor register in anappropriate manner require calculations to be made for every read and/orwrite to a subject processor register. In contrast to this, theinvention requires calculations on infrequent occasions, therebyproviding a more efficient representation of subject processorregisters.

The invention requires that the unambiguous current state (i.e. thevalidity or otherwise of each of the three component abstract registers)of each subject processor register is known at all times, so that thecorrect combination of abstract registers may be made when a readinstruction is made to the subject processor register which thoseabstract registers represent.

If the initial state of a subject processor register on entry to a BasicBlock were to be unknown at translate time, target-processor code totest the state of the register would have to be generated. For thisreason, the emulation system according to the invention ensures that thestate of each subject processor register is always known at translatetime. In the system according to the present invention this is done bypropagating the register state from one Intermediate Representation (IR)Block to the next. For example, IR Block 100 propagates the state of‘d0’ to its successor IR Block 200, and IR Block 200 acts in a similarway propagating register state to IR Block 300. An example of thispropagation of the subject processor register state is shown in FIG. 6.

In FIG. 6, IR Block 200 has two possible successors, either IR Block 300or back at the beginning of IR Block 200. The route between IR Blocks200 and 300 is shown with an arrow labeled as ‘a’. The route from theend back to the beginning of IR Block 200 is shown as a dotted linelabeled ‘b’ (a dotted line is used since, although this route exists ithas not yet been traversed in the current execution of the translatedprogram). If during the execution of the translated program, IR Block200 were to branch back to itself along route ‘b’, the states itpropagates would be incompatible with the abstract registers stateswhich were originally passed to IR Block 200 by IR Block 100. Since theintermediate representation is specific to the state of the abstractregisters IR Block 200 cannot be re-executed. For the correct operationof the invention across IR Block boundaries, each IR Block must have anunambiguous representation of the current state of the subject processorregister (as represented by the abstract registers). The existence ofroute ‘b’ therefore is incompatible with the operation of the inventionacross the boundary between IR Block 100 and IR Block 200.

To overcome this problem the invention is able to represent a BasicBlock of subject processor code using more than one IR Block withdifferent entry conditions. The IR Blocks which are used to represent asingle Basic Block with different entry conditions are referred to asIsoBlocks. Each IsoBlock is a representation of the same Basic Block ofsubject processor code, but under different entry conditions. FIG. 7shows two IsoBlocks which are used to overcome the problem illustratedin FIG. 6. IsoBlock 200 a is a correct representation of Basic Block 2,but only if the state of subject processor register ‘d0’ at the start ofIR Block 200 is ✓XX (this corresponds to IR block 200 of FIG. 6). Whensuccessor route ‘b’ in FIG. 7 is traversed for the first time, all theIsoBlocks in existence which represent Basic Block 2, (there is only onein this case, the IR Block), are tested for compatibility with theabstract register states that are to be propagated (i.e. ✓✓X). If acompatible IsoBlock is found (i.e. one that begins with the registerstate ✓✓X), the successor route ‘b’ will be permanently connected tothat IsoBlock. In the illustrated example of FIG. 7 there is no existingIsoBlock that route ‘b’ is compatible with, and so new IsoBlock 200 b,must be created. IsoBlock 200 b is created by decoding for a second timethe subject processor instructions that make up Basic Block 2, using aninitial assumption that the state of subject processor register ‘d0’ atthe start of Basic Block 2 is ✓✓X.

When successor route ‘c’, originating from IsoBlock 200 b, is traversedfor the first time, a compatibility test is performed with IR Block 300.Since route ‘c’ is compatible with IR Block 300, a new IsoBlock does notneed to be created, and both successor route ‘a’ and successor route ‘c’are connected to IR Block 300.

The low-level details concerning the compatibility test mentioned abovewill differ between different Front End modules, since they depend onthe exact nature of overlapping registers provided in the subjectprocessor architecture. The necessary modifications of these detailswill be apparent to those skilled in the art.

The principle of creating an IsoBlock of intermediate representation fora given set of abstract register states on entry may be widened to anintermediate representation which represents a Basic Block of subjectprocessor code for specific values of a broad set of initial conditions.Known intermediate representations represent a block of instructions forail possible initial starting conditions, and are therefore required toinclude a significant amount of flexibility. Intermediate representationformed in this manner is by necessity complicated, and will in generalinclude elements which will never be used during execution.

The intermediate representation according to the invention isadvantageous because it represents a Basic Block of code for specificvalues of entry conditions and is therefore more compact than knownintermediate representations. A further advantage of the invention isthat all intermediate representation which is generated is used at leastonce, and time is not wasted producing unnecessary additionalrepresentation.

Although the above description is directed towards emulation, it will beappreciated by those skilled in the art that the invention may also beused in other applications, for example the optimisation of code duringcompilation.

1. A computer apparatus, comprising: a first programmable processor; andan emulation system operable to execute register-based program codereferring to a set of registers for a second processor on said firstprocessor through generation of an intermediate representation of saidprogram code, said generation comprising the steps of: generating aplurality of register objects each representing a respective one of saidregisters as referenced by the program code; generating one or moreexpression objects each representing a respective operator or operand ofthe program code as that element arises in the program code; and,generating a network of said register objects and expression objectswith each said expression object being referenced by one or more of saidregister object to which it relates either directly, or indirectly viareferences from other of said expression objects.
 2. The computerapparatus of claim 1, wherein said program code is expressed in terms ofan instruction set of said second processor.
 3. The computer apparatusof claim 1, wherein said generation further comprises the step ofdividing said program code into a plurality of basic blocks each havingonly one effective entry point instruction and one effective exit pointinstruction, and performing said generating steps sequentiallyblock-by-block with respect to said plurality of basic blocks.
 4. Thecomputer apparatus of claim 1, wherein at least some of said expressionobjects reference more than one of said register objects.
 5. Thecomputer apparatus of claim 1, wherein said expression objects are notduplicated.
 6. The computer apparatus of claim 1, wherein a single saidexpression object is generated for a given operator or operand of saidprogram code, and each said expression object is referenced by all saidregister objects to which it relates.
 7. The computer apparatus of claim1, further comprising the step of eliminating one or more of saidregister objects or said expression objects if they are identified asbeing redundant or unnecessary.
 8. The computer apparatus of claim 7,further comprising the step of identifying a redundant or unnecessarysaid register object or said expression object by maintaining an ongoingcount of references being made to that object as the network of registerobjects and expression objects is constructed in said intermediaterepresentation.
 9. The computer apparatus of claim 8, wherein for eachexpression object a count is maintained of the number of references tothat expression object from other expression objects or from registerobjects, the count associated with a particular expression object beingadjusted each time a reference to that expression object is made orremoved.
 10. The computer apparatus of claim 9, wherein an expressionobject and all references from that expression object are eliminatedwhen said count for that expression object is zero.
 11. The computerapparatus of claim 1, wherein said generation further comprises the stepof translating the program code written for execution by a processor ofa first type so that the program code may be executed by a processor ofa second type, using the generated intermediate representation.
 12. Thecomputer apparatus of claim 11, wherein said translating step isperformed dynamically as the program code is run.
 13. The computerapparatus of claim 1, wherein said generation further comprisescomprising optimising the program code by optimising the generatedintermediate representation.
 14. The computer apparatus of claim 13,wherein said optimising step is used to optimise the program codewritten for execution by a processor of a first type so that the programcode may be executed more efficiently by that processor.
 15. A computerapparatus, comprising: a first programmable processor; and an emulationsystem operable to execute register-based program code referring to aset of registers for a second processor on said first processor throughgeneration of an intermediate representation of said program code, saidgeneration comprising the steps of: generating a plurality of registerobjects in the intermediate representation, each said register objectrepresenting a respective one of the set of registers as referenced bythe program code; and, generating a plurality of expression objects inthe intermediate representation, said expression objects representingfixed values and/or relationships between said fixed values and saidregisters according to said program code; and generating a branchedtree-like network of said register objects and said expression objectshaving all said register objects at the lowest basic root or tree-trunklevel of the network with none of said register objects feeding into anyother of said register objects.
 16. A computer apparatus, comprising: afirst programmable computer; and an emulation system operable to executeregister-based program code referring to a set of registers written fora second computer on said first computer through generation of anintermediate representation of said program code, said generationcomprising the steps of: generating a plurality of register objects inthe intermediate representation, each said register object representinga respective one of the set of registers as referenced by the programcode; and generating a plurality of expression objects in theintermediate representation, said expression objects representing fixedvalues and/or relationships between said fixed values and said registersaccording to said program code; and generating a branched tree-likenetwork of said register objects and said expression objects having allsaid register objects at the lowest basic root or tree-trunk level ofthe network with none of said register objects feeding into any other ofsaid register objects.